Rock doesn't sound right
Deep Purple's Deep Purple AKA Deep Purple III is a well recorded album. If this doesn't sound clear and enjoyable and like a set of professional musicians playing actual instruments then the problem is with the hi-fi and not the recording.
Deep Purple's Deep Purple AKA Deep Purple III is a well recorded album. If this doesn't sound clear and enjoyable and like a set of professional musicians playing actual instruments then the problem is with the hi-fi and not the recording.
The only Deep Purple track that I know is 'Smoke on the Water' which sounds a bit dull and muffled to me.
Other music sounds very clear and dynamic on my hifi so I'm pretty certain it's not the system.
Rock is another type of music thats really hard to reproduce on a stereo, it requirees more scale than most modern amp/speakers can produce. that live feel and the energy it comes with - I heard Sabbath (no Ozzy) warming up back in the very early 90's at a small venue, cotton in ears they sounded superb, real musicians - can't ever see a 'system reproducing that.
That said I would have thought that in a surround sound mode - i.e playing music through one of the dsp modes to fire music from all speakers in the room would give you more scale and more of a 'rock' sound/feel.
I doubt any budget amp could match your rx for grunt by the way.
I couldn't agree more. There are lots of rock songs I heard live and they blew me away. Then I got the cd and played it back home, it just didn't cut it. So I just blamed my affordability and drew the conclusion.
purple111....good call 
The only Deep Purple track that I know is 'Smoke on the Water' which sounds a bit dull and muffled to me.
Using SOTW as as an example, I've heard it on Deepest Purple - The Very Best Of Deep Purple (bland), The Best Rock Anthems In The World...Ever! (pretty good) and Machine Head 40th Anniverary Edition (very good, but a bit compressed...not too much though). Plus there is a 1997 remaster available on Deepest Purple 30th Anniversary Edition which also sounds good.
The only Deep Purple track that I know is 'Smoke on the Water' which sounds a bit dull and muffled to me.
Using SOTW as as an example, I've heard it on Deepest Purple - The Very Best Of Deep Purple (bland), The Best Rock Anthems In The World...Ever! (pretty good) and Machine Head (very good). Plus there is a 1997 remaster available on Deepest Purple 30th Anniversary Edition which imo sounds the best of the lot.
Top man Major
This is where Spotify comes in handy, you can check the mastering quality before commiting the readies.
To give a personal example, one of my favourite pieces of music is To The Unknown Man by Vangelis, but buy it on the album it came from (Spiral, 1977) and the quality is horrid, no matter if you buy it on vinyl or CD: muffled mess with no top end. Much of the album is the same; very poor mastering and SQ. Yet check-out the same track on the 1981 Greatest Hits double album (where I first heard it) and it's brilliant.
Not necessarily; it depends which version Spotify used. Not all releases have the same mastering so this is no guarantee in real terms.
Well put it this way, it's a guide. I'm not going to split hairs.
On albums where I've felt the mastering is rubbish (Vangelis, Spiral for starters), it's just as rubbish on Spotify as it is on CD, and off the top of my head I can't think of any instances where the reverse has been true. But I know there are lots of variables, I said as such in my earlier post.
Something worth looking at (listening to) for those into the Apple way of things is their "Mastered for iTunes" tracks. Had quite a few playing in the office recently and without exception all have sounded great. Full bodied yet clear and rhythmically tight with the Stones and Pink Floyd tracks I've heard. Nothing thin or harsh so far.
Something worth looking at (listening to) for those into the Apple way of things is their "Mastered for iTunes" tracks. Had quite a few playing in the office recently and without exception all have sounded great. Full bodied yet clear and rhythmically tight with the Stones and Pink Floyd tracks I've heard. Nothing thin or harsh so far.
I quite agree about different cds quality, was going to buy some Led Zepp complilation but some of the reviews about sound quality put me off. Same with same cds some artists have many versions of same cd, ie Miles Davis Kind of Blue must be about 50 different ones, the best apparently are the gold ones but not available new anymore, early ones had wrong speed on the original tapes. Japanese pressed ones are generally better quality it seems. Actually the problem of finding the best version is a bit of a minefield, not helped by Amazon lumping all the reviews for a album under the same review, this is further complicated by different formats, like SACD etc.
Oh absolutely, and one thing I always used to respect WHF for is that when they reviewed a piece of equipment, they'd tell you not only what music they used but also the exact album. I don't know if they do this now.
Rock is another type of music thats really hard to reproduce on a stereo, it requirees more scale than most modern amp/speakers can produce. that live feel and the energy it comes with - I heard Sabbath (no Ozzy) warming up back in the very early 90's at a small venue, cotton in ears they sounded superb, real musicians - can't ever see a 'system reproducing that.
That said I would have thought that in a surround sound mode - i.e playing music through one of the dsp modes to fire music from all speakers in the room would give you more scale and more of a 'rock' sound/feel.
I doubt any budget amp could match your rx for grunt by the way.